YOUR FEDERAL TAXPAYER RECEIPT
UNDERSTAND HOW AND WHERE YOUR TAX DOLLARS ARE BEING SPENT
Enter your 2011 payments below or select an estimate from the drop down menu!

Finally!!! The Most Transparent and Honest Administration Evah was living up to its lofty rhetoric! Feeling positively tingly with excitement, we prepared to type in our annual income and find out just how our tax dollars are spent!

Imagine our shock and disappointment when we found that according to the Obama White House, no one in America makes over 80K a year!

We beg your assistance in understanding this puzzling omission. Did the administration really intend to leave out the 40% of US households with income above 80K? (in other words, households headed by mostly married couples with multiple wage earners... you know, the households who pay the lion's share of income taxes?).

Here is a summary of some of the key demographic differences between American households in the bottom and top income quintiles in 2010:

1. On average, there were significantly more income earners per household in the top income quintile households (1.97) than earners per household in the lowest-income households (0.43).

2. Married-couple households represented a much greater share of the top income quintile (78.4 percent) than for the bottom income quintile (17 percent), and single-parent or single households represented a much greater share of the bottom quintile (83 percent) than for the top quintile (21.6 percent).

3. Roughly 3 out of 4 households in the top income quintile included individuals in their prime earning years between the ages of 35-64, compared to only 43.6 percent of household members in the bottom fifth who were in that age group.

4. Compared to members of the top income quintile, household members in the bottom income quintile were 1.6 times more likely to be in the youngest age group (under 35 years), and three times more likely to be in the oldest age group (65 years and over).

5. More than four times as many top quintile households included at least one adult who was working full-time in 2010 (77.2 percent) compared to the bottom income quintile (only 17.4 percent), and more than five times as many households in the bottom quintile included adults who did not work at all (68.2 percent) compared to top quintile households whose family members did not work (13.3 percent).

6. Family members of households in the top income quintile were about five times more likely to have a college degree (60.3 percent) than members of households in the bottom income quintile (only 12.1 percent). In contrast, family members of the lowest income quintile were 12 times more likely than those in the top income quintile to have less than a high school degree in 2010 (26.7 percent vs. 2.2 percent).

But wait! There's more hokey tax gimmickry in store! Via Memeorandum, we were amused to see none other than Dana Milbank lampooning the administration's blatantly cynical demagoguery:

President Obama admits it: His proposed “Buffett Rule” tax on millionaires is a gimmick.

“There are others who are saying: ‘Well, this is just a gimmick. Just taxing millionaires and billionaires, just imposing the Buffett Rule, won’t do enough to close the deficit,’ ” Obama declared Wednesday. “Well, I agree.”

Actually, the gimmick was apparent even without the president’s acknowledgment. He gave his remarks in a room in the White House complex adorned with campaign-style photos of his factory tours. On stage with him were eight props: four millionaires, each paired with a middle-class assistant. The octet smiled and nodded so much as Obama made his case that it appeared the president was sharing the stage with eight bobbleheads.

And if that’s not enough evidence of gimmickry, after his speech Obama’s reelection campaign unveiled an online tax calculator “to see how your tax rate stacks up against Mitt Romney’s — and then see what the Buffett Rule would do.”

Apparently when the White House says, "The Buffet Rule AND YOU", they mean "The Buffet Rule applied to some arbitrarily chosen number that gives us the result we want you to see". What did any of this have to do with the annual income we entered? Our math skillz may not be up to the level of the smart people working at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, but as far as we can see, nothing. Nada. Zippo.

Oh, the humanity! We are invisible: as far as the aptly named White [Male] House is concerned, we don't even exist. Now if we invisible folk would only shut up and fork over our fair share of our earned income to the folks who really matter, Obama could get on with the hard work of transforming America into a more diverse, inclusive nation where the failed, divisive politics of yesteryear were just a bad memory.

Posted by Cassandra at April 12, 2012 08:41 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.villainouscompany.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/4129

Comments

OMG *thudding all over the place and wondering where my evil other half is with the VC Fainting Couch*

Knowing the alleged level of Mitt Romney's tax rate, and the fact that he prolly files a joint return (I haven't seen his actual return, fercryin'outloud), that should 'splain the disparity, Loosey. You and your partner in economic recovery are assigned an equal share.

Back to the Romney Rate: He also pays 15% of his income to charity, so the Buffet Rule may or may not be a deterrent to Mittens' exuberant giving.

Come, come, Madam--the answer to your puzzle is quite apparent, and it has a happy side effect.

Simply divide your salary by 4 (or 5, or whatever) to get your income down to the proper level for entry into the ObamaBooks.

The happy side effect? Your dividing has produced all those extra voters we see in elections. You didn't really think the same person voted multiple times, did you? Or that, even in Chicago, the dead were voting?

The happy side effect? Your dividing has produced all those extra voters we see in elections. You didn't really think the same person voted multiple times, did you? Or that, even in Chicago, the dead were voting?

Apparently it's not just Reality that has a liberal bias. So does Math :p

This is very handy for those of us who can't do math. But let me see if I understand this correctly: If we pass the Warren Buffet Tax then we'll all make $42,500 a year. Or is it if we don't pass the Warren Buffet Tax that we'll all make $42,500 a year? Never mind. I'm still confused.

Great post on this topic ...I know this may be a bit off topic but can someone help me with a black hat seo question? I'm just curious if someone could use black hat seo methods to hurt someone’s reputation or website rankings?